Literature DB >> 25512766

Quality indicators for colonoscopy: Current insights and caveats.

Hendrikus Jm Pullens1, Peter D Siersema1.   

Abstract

Colonoscopy is the diagnostic modality of choice for investigation of symptoms suspected to be related to the colon and for the detection of polyps and colorectal cancer (CRC). Colonoscopy with removal of detected polyps has been shown to reduce the incidence and mortality of subsequent CRC. In many countries, population screening programs for CRC have been initiated, either by selection of patients for colonoscopy with fecal occult blood testing or by offering colonoscopy directly to average-risk individuals. Several endoscopy societies have formulated quality indicators for colonoscopy. These quality indicators are almost always incorporated as process indicators, rather than outcome measures. This review focuses on the quality indicators bowel preparation, cecal intubation rate, withdrawal time, adenoma detection rate, patient comfort, sedation and complication rate, and discusses the scientific evidence supporting them, as well as their potential shortcomings and issues that need to be addressed. For instance, there is still no clear and generally accepted definition of adequate bowel preparation, no robust scientific evidence is available supporting a cecal intubation rate ≥ 90% and the association between withdrawal time and occurrence of interval cancers has not been clarified. Adenoma detection rate is currently the only quality indicator that has been shown to be associated with interval colorectal cancer, but as an indicator it does not differentiate between subjects with one or more adenoma detected.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adenoma detection rate; Bowel preparation; Cecal intubation; Colonoscopy; Complication; Interval colorectal cancer; Post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer; Quality indicators; Screening; Withdrawal time

Year:  2014        PMID: 25512766      PMCID: PMC4265954          DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v6.i12.571

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc


  119 in total

1.  Colonoscopic withdrawal technique is associated with adenoma miss rates.

Authors:  D K Rex
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  High definition colonoscopy vs. standard video endoscopy for the detection of colonic polyps: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  V Subramanian; J Mannath; C J Hawkey; K Ragunath
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 10.093

3.  Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice.

Authors:  D K Rex; E Y Rahmani; J H Haseman; G T Lemmel; S Kaster; J S Buckley
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  Impact of colonic cleansing on quality and diagnostic yield of colonoscopy: the European Panel of Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy European multicenter study.

Authors:  Florian Froehlich; Vincent Wietlisbach; Jean-Jacques Gonvers; Bernard Burnand; John-Paul Vader
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Risk factors for inadequate colonoscopy bowel preparations in African Americans and whites at an urban medical center.

Authors:  Anoop Appannagari; Shikha Mangla; Chuanhong Liao; K Gautham Reddy; Sonia S Kupfer
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 0.954

6.  Adenomas are detected more often in morning than in afternoon colonoscopy.

Authors:  Madhusudhan R Sanaka; Fnu Deepinder; Prashanthi N Thota; Rocio Lopez; Carol A Burke
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-06-02       Impact factor: 10.864

7.  Detachable snare versus epinephrine injection in the prevention of postpolypectomy bleeding: a randomized and controlled study.

Authors:  P Di Giorgio; L De Luca; G Calcagno; G Rivellini; M Mandato; B De Luca
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 10.093

8.  Impact of proximal colon retroflexion on adenoma miss rates.

Authors:  Matthew Harrison; Navjot Singh; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 10.864

9.  2 L PEG plus ascorbic acid versus 4 L PEG plus simethicon for colonoscopy preparation: a randomized single-blind clinical trial.

Authors:  Maurizio Gentile; Michele De Rosa; Giovanni Cestaro; Pietro Forestieri
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.719

10.  Boston Bowel Preparation Scale scores provide a standardized definition of adequate for describing bowel cleanliness.

Authors:  Audrey H Calderwood; Paul C Schroy; David A Lieberman; Judith R Logan; Michael Zurfluh; Brian C Jacobson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2014-03-12       Impact factor: 9.427

View more
  9 in total

1.  Optimal Timing of Simethicone Addition for Bowel Preparation Using Polyethylene Glycol Plus Ascorbic Acid.

Authors:  Haewon Kim; Bong Min Ko; Hyeon Jeong Goong; Yun Ho Jung; Seong Ran Jeon; Hyun Gun Kim; Moon Sung Lee
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2019-04-11       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 2.  What Can We Do to Optimize Colonoscopy and How Effective Can We Be?

Authors:  Kelli S Hancock; Ranjan Mascarenhas; David Lieberman
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2016-06

3.  Different position from traditional left lateral for colonoscopy? A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized control trials.

Authors:  Snow Yunni Lin; Clyve Yu Leon Yaow; Cheng Han Ng; Neng Wei Wong; Hui Yu Tham; Choon Seng Chong
Journal:  Chronic Dis Transl Med       Date:  2020-10-22

4.  Comprehensive functional genomic analyses link APC somatic mutation and mRNA-miRNA networks to the clinical outcome of stage-III colorectal cancer patients.

Authors:  Sum-Fu Chiang; Heng-Hsuan Huang; Wen-Sy Tsai; Bertrand Chin-Ming Tan; Chia-Yu Yang; Po-Jung Huang; Ian Yi-Feng Chang; Jiarong Lin; Pei-Shan Lu; En Chin; Yu-Hao Liu; Jau-Song Yu; Jy-Ming Chiang; Hsin-Yuan Hung; Jeng-Fu You; Hsuan Liu
Journal:  Biomed J       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 7.892

5.  Double-Balloon Endoscopy after Incomplete Colonoscopy and Its Comparison with Computed Tomography Colonography.

Authors:  Carlijn Hermans; Dennis van der Zee; Lennard Gilissen
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2018-01-10

6.  Factors predicting the colorectal adenoma detection rate in colonoscopic screening of a Chinese population: A prospective study.

Authors:  Han Wang; Pu Wang; Xiaogang Liu; Liangping Li; Xun Xiao; Peixi Liu; Di Zhang; Yi Li; Guangre Xu; Mengtian Tu; Yan Song
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  Adenoma Detection Rate in Colonoscopic Screening with Ketamine-based Sedation: A Prospective Observational Study.

Authors:  Mirza Kovacevic; Nermina Rizvanovic; Adisa Sabanovic Adilovic; Nedim Barucija; Anida Abazovic
Journal:  Medeni Med J       Date:  2022-03-18

8.  Does the withdrawal time affect adenoma detection in non-screening colonoscopies?

Authors:  Ammar Al-Rifaie; Mohammed El-Feki; Ismaeel Al-Talib; Maysam Abdulwahid; Andrew Hopper; Mo Thoufeeq
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-03-16

Review 9.  Developments in Screening Tests and Strategies for Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Justin L Sovich; Zachary Sartor; Subhasis Misra
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-10-04       Impact factor: 3.411

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.